Single Market: how a strong enforcement policy can bring it to the next level

The EESC has adopted an own-initiative opinion providing recommendations on how to strengthen enforcement policy as a central tool to reduce fragmentation within the Single Market. The opinion builds on some of the key recommendations of the Letta and Draghi reports and provides elements to ensure the rapid implementation of the Single Market Strategy, in which the Commission admits a need to step up enforcement efforts. The opinion thus urges the European Commission to adopt a clear, coordinated approach that balances preventive, collaborative and remedial measures to enforce EU law. It also stresses the fundamental responsibility of Member States to implement EU law promptly and correctly.

There are concerns for the decline in enforcement efforts by the European Commission: the Single Market Scoreboard for 2023 showed cumulative decrease of 21% over the previous 4 years in the number of Single Market infringement cases shown. This can be explained by the decreasing number of new directives to be transposed, the growing support provided to Member States to transpose and apply them, and the increasing use of the EU Pilot dialogue between the Commission and Member States. However, some academics claim that it can be because the Commission suffers from too much political influence due to its dual role as enforcer and as a political driver for integration.

There is wide agreement on the need to strengthen the enforcement policy, and this is acknowledged in the Single Market Strategy. A weak enforcement policy, subject to external interference, maintains barriers, inequalities and fragmentation of the Single Market. As a meaningful step forward, the Commission has, in July 2025, broadened the scope of the annual Rule of Law Reports to include the Single Market dimension, focusing on issues affecting cross-border companies, especially SMEs, and providing guidance to Member States to ensure enforcement of market legislation.

Against this background, the opinion calls for a deep reflection on the use and adequacy of preventive measures to avoid fragmentation and compliance risks when designing EU legislation; a clear and coordinated approach between the preventive, collaborative and remedial tools; more transparent and streamlined infringement procedures to ensure accountability on the exercise of its wide powers and the use and availability of EU tools vis-a-vis citizens and businesses.

Regarding the prevention of possible infringements, the adequate implementation of EU law should be integrated into all steps of the legislative process, identifying legal, administrative or practical challenges to transposing and implementing legislation, arrangements to track progress, support measures (including for SMEs) and a clear timeline for each legislative measure.

We underline the importance to apply these principles through the drafting, negotiation and adoption of European legislation, and stress the need to adopt legislation that can be easily implemented. This shall be an obligation not only for the Commission, but also for the co-legislators: very often, as a result of negotiations, many relevant questions are left open for Member States to decide, even including ‘opt-outs’ or invitations to ‘gold-plating’. This is a major problem against the level playing field within the Single Market, and consequently, we call for a formal engagement by Member States to avoid gold-plating in national transpositions or application of EU law.

We ask the Commission to:

• update the 2022 Communication on enforcement;
• simplify and strengthen the different existing tools to ensure compliance (e.g., SOLVIT, SMET, package meetings, EU-Pilots, IMI), while improving the coordination in their use;
• simplify the access to complainants and citizens to tools like TRIS; and
• enhance the compliance culture by presenting enforcement priorities annually and adequately reporting on them.

In this context, we call on Member States to provide future Single Market sherpas (introduced in the Single Market Strategy) with the necessary resources and to appoint special authorities specifically dedicated to Single Market affairs. It will not be possible to strengthen enforcement without allocating more resources for the Commission DGs responsible for implementation and enforcement, but also for the national authorities that play a primary role in ensuring the correct implementation of EU Law.

When it comes to infringement procedures, as the key deterrence tool, the Commission must reduce the duration of infringement procedures; increase their transparency, including the information about the different stages and the result in case of closure of the procedure a; and enhance communication to complainants.

More agile and transparent infringement procedures are key to avoid situations of legal uncertainty and the long-term negative consequences for businesses, workers and consumers.

To conclude, the opinion makes a strong call to Member States: their political will is essential to strengthen compliance and achieve a simple, seamless and strong Single Market. Only with a coordinated and urgent effort we will be able to bring the Single Market to the next level and ensure that it can, in this way, bring the much-needed renewed strength and growth to the EU.

By Isabel YGLESIAS JULIÀ, Rapporteur of INT/1085 Strengthening enforcement of Single Market Rules: revision of current tools and framework